You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Investigating the effect of a 3-month workplace-based pedometer-driven walking programme on health-related quality of life in meat processing workers: a feasibility study within a randomized controlled trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, April 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12889-015-1736-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Suliman Mansi, Stephan Milosavljevic, Steve Tumilty, Paul Hendrick, Chris Higgs, David G Baxter |
| Abstract |
In New Zealand, meat processing populations face many health problems as a result of the nature of work in meat processing industries. The primary aim of this study was to examine the feasibility of using a pedometer-based intervention to increase physical activity and improve health-related outcomes in a population of meat processing workers. A single-blinded randomized controlled trial (RCT) was conducted. A convenience sample of meat workers (n = 58; mean age 41.0 years; range: 18-65) participated in the trial. Participants were randomly allocated into two groups. Intervention participants (n = 29) utilized a pedometer to self monitor their activity, whilst undertaking a brief intervention, and educational material. Control participants (n = 29) received educational material only. The primary outcomes of ambulatory activity, and health-related quality of life, were evaluated at baseline, immediately following the 12-week intervention and three months post-intervention. Fifty three participants completed the program (91.3% adherence). Adherence with the intervention group was high, 93% (n = 27/29), and this group increased their mean daily step count from 5993 to 9792 steps per day, while the control group steps changed from 5788 to 6551 steps per day from baseline. This increase in step counts remained significant within the intervention group p < 0.005; at three months post-intervention representing a 59% increase over baseline scores. There were significant group changes with large effect sizes for step count change (d = 1.94) and self-reported physical activity (p < 0.005; d = 2.59) at 12 weeks intervention. Further, results showed non-significant between-group differences in physical component (PCS) and mental component (MCS) scores (PCS: p = 0.44; MGD = 0.99, 95% CI, -1.6 to 3.6; ES = 0.14, and MCS: p = 0.90, MGD = 0.15; 95% CI, -2.3 to 2.6, ES = 0.022) at 12 weeks intervention. This research provides important information for a larger (RCT) in the future: results demonstrated that a pedometer-driven walking intervention in combination with goal setting, and self-monitoring supported by weekly e-mails are feasible and potentially effective in increasing step count within the workplace setting over the short term. Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) ACTRN12613000087752 . |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 212 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Indonesia | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 208 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 35 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 31 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 24 | 11% |
| Researcher | 21 | 10% |
| Other | 11 | 5% |
| Other | 30 | 14% |
| Unknown | 60 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 38 | 18% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 34 | 16% |
| Psychology | 22 | 10% |
| Sports and Recreations | 16 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 4% |
| Other | 31 | 15% |
| Unknown | 63 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 April 2015.
All research outputs
#14,428,455
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#10,292
of 15,466 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#135,410
of 267,651 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#160
of 248 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,466 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.3. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 267,651 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 248 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.